Prolactin and Oxytocin Interaction in the Paraventricular and Supraoptic Nuclei: Effects on Oxytocin mRNA and Nitric Oxide Synthase
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated the contribution of prolactin and oxytocin to the increase in staining for NADPH-d and oxytocin mRNA in the paraventricular nucleus (PVN) and supraoptic nucleus (SON) observed at the end of pregnancy, or following a steroid-priming regimen that mimics the hormonal profile of late pregnant females. Ovariectomized rats received chronic implants of silastic capsules containing oestrogen and progesterone followed by progesterone removal. In experiment 1, oxytocin antagonist (OTA) was administered to rats to investigate whether intranuclear oxytocin release was necessary for NADPH-d staining. In experiments 2a and b, rats received concurrent treatment with bromocryptine (0.5 mg/day) to suppress endogenous prolactin release, and either systemic prolactin (0.5 mg once daily), or prolactin (2 micro g/ micro l), or vehicle infused twice a day into the third ventricle, or chronic oxytocin infusion (24 ng/day) for 3 days following progesterone removal. Brains were then processed for NADPH-d histochemistry. In experiment 3, the interaction of prolactin and oxytocin on oxytocin mRNA within the SON and PVN was examined. NADPH-d staining in the SON and PVN was reduced by the highest dose of the OTA, and by bromocryptine treatment. Central prolactin and oxytocin replacement completely restored NADPH-d staining in bromocryptine-treated rats. Finally, both bromocryptine and the OTA suppressed oxytocin mRNA expression and prolactin replacement restored expression levels to that of controls. Together, these data suggest that the increased capacity to produce nitric oxide in the SON and PVN during late pregnancy is dependent on prolactin stimulating oxytocin gene mRNA and hence intranuclear oxytocin release.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".